Reality Check India

OBC admission figures in IIT

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on August 5, 2007

Even after a whole year of being in the limelight, the media has not been able to ignite an informed debate among the masses. We cant look even an inch past rhetoric and sweeping labels.

Consider this report on OBC admissions in IIT 2007. While this throws welcome light on the admission figures, it asks the wrong kind of questions. First the data :

The IITs had then asked students to declare in the examination hall whether they were OBCs or not. Of the 2.43 lakh students who took the JEE, 45,576 (18.75%) were OBCs.

..

The IITs had then asked students to declare in the examination hall whether they were OBCs or not. Of the 2.43 lakh students who took the JEE, 45,576 (18.75%) were OBCs.

Source : ET Report

Two things : (1) the OBCs whose representation in the candidate pool was 18.75% managed to secure 14% of the seats.  (2) the maximum number of OBCs who got in on merit were from the “Chennai region”. I am willing to bet that within the Chennai region, the overwhelming majority are from Hyderabad.

Then the story goes on to ask:

When there are so many OBC students who are doing well naturally, why set aside seats for them and demoralise them?’’ asked an OBC student who joined IIT Bombay. On the other hand, pro-reservationists declare that the fact that OBCs have done well even without any special treatment shows up the standard ‘no merit’ argument of anti-reservationists as false

What does this kind of data tell us about the OBC reservation policy ?

It tells us that the group of castes selected for inclusion in the OBC group are underrepresented as an aggregate in a certain institution. It also tells us that the within the group of castes, the ones from AP (perhaps the entire south) are doing quite well.

Anything else ?

What about the “quotas dilute merit” argument ?

Of all the arguments, this is one that must not be used by anyone who opposes the OBC quota. Nothing dilutes merit – because merit itself is a moving target. For example : you can give priority admissions to students whose names start with a vowel, or you can bar balding students from pursuing surgical disciplines. Will any of these affect merit ? Hairy students will gladly replace the bald ones in surgical disciplines, some may even go on to become great surgeons.

So what about the case in front of the court ?

I do not know if the court sees it this way, but my view is that we have constitutional issues in front of the court  – not simply the impugned OBC quota act. At the heart of the issue is the nature of the O.B.C group itself.

I have tried to get to the root question in 6 easy steps. Completely devoid of legal terms.

1. It is unlikely that anyone disputes the very existance of a group of citizens other than the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who are in need of social justice.

2. The form in which social justice is sought to be delivered is outright quotas to the target group.  This is a premise, so lets not dwell on the merits of outright quotas – or look at alternatives like Prof Yadavs JNU style affirmative action.

3. The preferred criteria along which the groups in (1), are to be identified are along caste lines.  The nine judge bench accepted the use of caste to identify classes of people other than SC/STs who need social justice in the form of quotas. This is one of the side effects of the Mandal judgement and maybe a larger bench can relook at this. For now, it holds the field. So lets move on.

4. A group of castes (other than SCs and STs) are selected and included in the group. It is then sought to administer social justice to this group in the form of quotas in education and jobs. We give a name to this group of castes and call it “Other Backward Castes (Classes)” or OBCs.

5. For whatever reason, data is not considered critical to validate the inclusion of castes in this group. Lets waive even this per-caste data requirement and see where this leads us to. Please dont bring up RTI as a solution here. The Supreme Court is seeking this kind of data, so the the government already has the ultimate RTI in front of it.

6. Let us assume that somehow there exists a caste X in this group. One that is capable of competing in the open competition. Not necessarily in all exams and in all disciplines, but it demonstrates a clear “presence of abilities”. For example : the caste X produces many toppers in board exams, takes a good (not necessarily proportionate) share of medical seats, has good political representation and so forth.

It is immaterial how caste X got to this enviable position. It could be  hard work, good community leadership, misclassificaton, or even due to the success of the reservation system. What matters is that at this time caste X shows the presence of abilities !

This leads us to two central questions that must be answered by the court.

1. Does a caste X as described above even exist ?  Does the non availability of current data impact our ability to predict the existance of this caste ? 

2. If a caste X as described above exists, what is the consitutionality of mandating a continued quota to this caste ?  How does this impact (1) OBC caste Y who may not have the abilities of caste X and (2) how does this impact caste Z who is excluded from the OBC list.

Advertisements

62 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Barbarindian said, on August 5, 2007 at 5:14 pm

    Merit dilution depends on a number of limiting factors. If you have caste based quotas in a primary school, or even technical trade institutes, merit will not be diluted to the extent:

    1. Generally a very large proportion of those seeking a seat get one
    2. The quality requirement of the output is a low bar that most can achieve
    3. Usually these places have a net excess capacity anyway.

    On the other hand, if you put caste quotas in say ISRO space research team, merit may get seriously diluted.

    The case of IITs and IIMs falls somewhere in between. I do believe quotas dilute merit for both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. It has to do with both immediate limiting factors as well as indirect effects.

  2. realitycheck said, on August 6, 2007 at 11:44 am

    >> It has to do with both immediate limiting factors as well as indirect effects. >>

    Agreed Barb, Let me put it another way.

    What if it comes to selection amongst folks with roughtly equal abilities.

    For example :
    1. Consider this hypothetical tie breaker scheme. If two candidates get equal marks – then we always reject the bald one in favour of the hairy one. (You can substitute caste/religion/economics/or whatever inplace of the hirsute references).

    Now can the bald one protest ? Can he claim that merit is affected ?

    Now relax the above scheme. Lets say the hairy one will be preferred over the bald candidate even if he scores upto 2 points less.

    Now can the bald one protest ? What if the hairy candidate claims that the exams are not perfect and the fact that he got two marks lesser does not mean he is any less meritorious.

    If you remove an clearly identifiable external factor such as untouchability, or race, and use a unmonitored marker system like “social and educational backwardness” – then you will end up with the above scenario.

    In my view, the bald candidates only complaint can be that his constitutional right to equality is violated.

    The only recourse is the constituion.

  3. Bruno said, on August 6, 2007 at 12:23 pm

    //1. Consider this hypothetical tie breaker scheme. If two candidates get equal marks – then we always reject the bald one in favour of the hairy one.//

    I am afraid that is anomaly is a little flawed…

    For example, there are two sets of students

    One who studied full time
    Another group, who were poor and have to work in the evenings to pay their fees….

    Now,….

    If two candidates get equal marks – we reject the candidate who studied full time and select the candidate who studied while working in the evenings….

    Because we assume that , if not for a factor (the factor being not able to study in the evenings), the student would have got MORE marks than he got now

    Is this logical……….

    This essentially is the criteria behind quotas….

    Now what could be those factors

    1. Govt School vs Private School
    2. Tuition vs Self Study
    3. Village vs City
    4. Educated parents vs Illiterate parents

    and so on

    I am afraid that bald head or hairy head does not come to this list

  4. Bruno said, on August 6, 2007 at 12:27 pm

    Now consider a running race…..

    Two guys finish exactly at the same time

    Who is a better runner

    1. One who started late.
    2. One who did not have proper shoes.
    3. One who did not have a coach.

    What is wrong in giving priority to the guy without proper shoes as he would have scored better if he had the same shoes and who has a talent in him to prosper

  5. Bruno said, on August 6, 2007 at 12:33 pm

    Now come to the main part

    Students from School A do not have a running coach
    Students from School B has a coach who trains runners

    Now

    When both these schools take part in a running race, and one guy Mr.X from School A and another guy Mr.Y from School B finish the 100m race at 9.92 seconds

    Another guy Mr.Z from School A finish the race at 9.93 seconds

    The fact is that Mr.X had a private coach while Mr.Z did not have a coach

    Now, who is the better runner

    Is that X, by virtue of his school
    or
    Is that Z……

    Now, you will understand that Mr.Z is a deserving person…. but how to give him the reward….. That is where you have the CREAMY LAYER Concept….

  6. Bruno said, on August 6, 2007 at 12:38 pm

    What will happen when the creamy layer concept is not followed

    The really deserving student from School A will not get the reward, but a student who may not be as deserving as Mr.Z will get the reward, just because he studied in the same school….

    Now whom does this actually affect… Mr.Z…..

    We can clearly see that the inclusion or exclusion of creamy layer is going to impact either Z or X and in no case Y…….

    So when Z wants the Creamy layer to be excluded and X wants the creamy layer to be included, we can understand

    But why is Mr.Y protesting over the exclusion of Creamy Layer

    I think this question has to be answered by those Anti Reservation Guys who want the Creamy Layer to be excluded

  7. realitycheck said, on August 6, 2007 at 12:39 pm

    >> What is wrong in giving priority to the guy without proper shoes as he would have scored better if he had the same shoes and who has a talent in him to prosper >>

    Yes Bruno, We must surely give priority to the guy without proper shoes. The catch (downside) is that now we must have a system in place that verifies the quality of shoes worn by the contestants.

    If we do not have a “shoe monitoring system” – what is to stop a person from claiming that the Nike shoes he is wearing actually sucks ?

    We have talked many times on this blog. You probably know that I am in favour of affirmative action in the form of quotas IF and ONLY IF there is strong and current data about the beneficiaries.

    The bald head example is only to illustrate that without data, we are essentially talking from emotion and life experiences. The only thing to distinguish one group from another is the caste name. This cannot be the basis for state policy.

  8. realitycheck said, on August 6, 2007 at 12:54 pm

    Bruno, Even though I disagree with you on many counts, you are asking the right questions that need an answer.

    What really upsets Y is the preferential treatment shown to people who are clearly equal or better to him in circumstance ? If School A is indeed lacking in facilities (such as a corporation school) then Y will likely not oppose the special treatment. It is the vast middle ground that is the problem.

    You raise an important question, why must Y’s opinion on the creamy layer matter ?

    I will respond later to this.

  9. Bruno said, on August 6, 2007 at 1:07 pm

    //If we do not have a “shoe monitoring system” – what is to stop a person from claiming that the Nike shoes he is wearing actually sucks ?//

    This is exactly my point…..

    But my question is that whether the Nike shoe sucks or not, it does not in any way bother Y.

    If X is telling a lie, it is Z who has to get angry….

    //It is the vast middle ground that is the problem.//

    Yes… But it is a problem for Z and IS NEVER A PROBLEM FOR Y….

    Now that only Z or X has to get into the 27 percent and Y cannot get into the 27 % why is Y unduly worried about this….

    //You raise an important question, why must Y’s opinion on the creamy layer matter ?

    I will respond later to this.//

    Expecting your answer for this…..

  10. Bruno said, on August 6, 2007 at 1:11 pm

    To sum it up….

    I fully agree that Forward Castes have a right to shout against reservation, and backward castes have a right to shout for reservation

    I am not at all discounting these facts.

    The question is very simple…
    In Tamil nadu, there is 50 % reservation for BC and MBC.

    Whether Creamy layer is included or excluded, a student from forward community cannot come into this…..

    So what is the actual reason for those from forward community asking for exclusion of Creamy layer

    ஆடு நனையுதேன்னு ஓநாய் ஏன் அழுகுது

  11. Bruno said, on August 6, 2007 at 1:19 pm

    //You raise an important question, why must Y’s opinion on the creamy layer matter ?//

    The question is not that… The question is slightly different

    Why should Y have an opinion at all…….

  12. Observer said, on August 6, 2007 at 5:09 pm


    /You raise an important question, why must Y’s opinion on the creamy layer matter ?//

    The question is not that… The question is slightly different

    Why should Y have an opinion at all…….

    Simple. because Y is not allowed into Z or X’s space. Y has no space at all. But why does X want to play in both the open space as well as the space into which Y is not allowed? X, who is as well equipped as Y otherwise, must choose one or the other. Right now he has it both ways, if he does not win the open space, he has a backup option which is not available to Y. Hence Y’s resentment against X, and not Z, for this double advantage.

  13. Barbarindian said, on August 7, 2007 at 2:39 am

    You can not question any citizen’s intent when he asks uncomfortable questions. A citizen has a right to know each and every detail about a scheme that violates his constitutional rights – as simple as that. Don’t like it? Too bad. We didn’t opt for socialism. Socialism has created a hell hole called India. Some dudes know how to milk the system and have the ability to do it. They are doing it.

  14. Jai_Choorakkot said, on August 7, 2007 at 7:21 am

    Bruno,
    “….Why should X have even an opinion?….”

    1.The locus standi thing reminded me of Muslims on personal law. Unlike that case however, X has accepted breach of his/her right to equality, to provide reservations to the truly deserving Z, not the advantaged Y.

    2. The empowerment of Z cannot be left to the tender mercies of Y (the one who stands to lose from such empowerment). Your implicit assumption of level ground btwn Y & Z is most likely untrue. In most cases the Ys are entrenched and have greater say in the pie-cutting.

    3. Any X can have an opinion on any subject as a matter of right.

    Until you got to that question, agreed with much in your comments, especially the non-equality of apparently equal candidates based on social/economic backwardness.

    The shoe monitoring system is indeed a must. RC, I think the hostility is coming from the idea (that I suggested before) that Y & Z are agreed that X is a malefactor intent on burying reservation in toto. It serves Y’s interests to play up this factor also.

    regards,
    Jai

  15. realitycheck said, on August 8, 2007 at 5:45 am

    >> I think the hostility is coming from the idea (that I suggested before) that Y & Z are agreed that X is a malefactor intent on burying reservation in toto. It serves Y’s interests to play up this factor also. >>

    Right on target – Jai

    I dont think I have too much extra to add to your response.

  16. Bruno said, on August 8, 2007 at 9:24 am

    Observer : “Y has no space at all. “you are mistaken. you do not understand reservation. Y still has 50 % to compete. Your statement is just an emotional outpouring. It is totally wrong

    Barbarindian : “A citizen has a right to know each and every detail about a scheme that violates his constitutional rights ” Exactly. That is why I said that Forward Castes have every right to question reservation. That is they have every right to fight against reservation. See my posts. But my question is much more specific. Once reservation is implemented, Forward castes do not have any benefit whether L or M or N is selected from that. In such as case, what is the need for Forward Caste to press for Creamy layer. I need an honest answer and not a diversion for this question.

    Jai : You say that “X has accepted breach of his/her right to equality”

    Does that mean that you are PRO RESERVATION ?????

    And Reality Check, does your right on target means that

    “You want 27 % quota But you want Creamy Layer”

    And here comes my main question

    WHy should some one WHO IS AGAINST QUOTA as for Creamy layer inclusion

    My point is that, you can ask for Creamy layer inclusion ONLY IF YOU ARE PRORESERVATION

    So, I need to know

    Whether you are

    1. Totally against reservation
    2. You want reservation with Inclusion of Creamy Layer
    3. You want reservation with Exclusion of Creamy Layer

    I do not need any explanation, if you are falling in category 1 or 3. If your father has availed reservation and is a IAS Officer, you will support 2. I can even understand that

    But if you have a very peculiar stand of
    I don’t want reservation, but want to excluse creamy layer

    I need your comments on that

    Also, Barbar Jai and Reality… Please tell your stand and the basis for that.

  17. Bruno said, on August 8, 2007 at 9:29 am

    Observer : Your comment is very funny…

    If you read very carefully, you will understand how illogical it is

    //Simple. because Y is not allowed into Z or X’s space. Y has no space at all.//
    Y has 50.5 %

    //But why does X want to play in both the open space as well as the space into which Y is not allowed? //
    THis is the basis for any reservation, including the Institute Quota in AIIMS, which Youth for Equality DO NOT OPPOSE. !!!!

    //X, who is as well equipped as Y otherwise, must choose one or the other. //
    This is also not as per the reservation.

    //Right now he has it both ways, if he does not win the open space, he has a backup option which is not available to Y. //
    This is the same for institute Quota. A candidate who did MBBS in AIIMS can compete in PG Entrance in Institute Quota as well as in Open Quota. Why is Youth for Equality not opposing this ???? This is the common problem in ALL TYPES OF RESERVATION

    //Hence Y’s resentment against X, and not Z, for this double advantage.//

    But did you forget that,

    With exclusion of Creamy Layer – > X will compete in Open Quota (along with Y)
    With Inclusion of Creamy Layer -> X will compete in reservation (so Y is free)

    So as per your own logic, If Y should not be affected by X who is equal to him, Creamy Layer should be included. (You are telling this and not me)

    Can you explain

  18. realitycheck said, on August 8, 2007 at 11:28 am

    >>
    1. Totally against reservation
    2. You want reservation with Inclusion of Creamy Layer
    3. You want reservation with Exclusion of Creamy Layer
    >>

    I accept caste-only based reservations for SCs (Dalits) only. Even this must be internally monitored to ensure equitable distribution among various Dalit castes nationwide.

    I am willing to accept caste based reservations for OBCs, if and only if there is strong and current data to back up the backwardness of each individual caste. The concept of creamy layer in and of itself makes no sense. It is only meant to be a minor check on abuse – assuming that the per-caste current backwardness data is available.

    For STs, the goal is to bring them into the “mainstream” out of isolation. This whole category is highly suspect right now in my view (case being the Meena community).

  19. Bruno said, on August 8, 2007 at 11:41 am

    //I accept caste-only based reservations for SCs (Dalits) only.//

    That is a very good point.

    // The concept of creamy layer in and of itself makes no sense. It is only meant to be a minor check on abuse//

    So you want inclusion or exclusion… Please be clear on this…..

    //, if and only if there is strong and current data //
    What data do you expect…..
    What are the parameters you want to ascertain that a community is backward

    Please tell

  20. Bruno said, on August 8, 2007 at 12:26 pm

    //The concept of creamy layer in and of itself makes no sense.//
    //This was a foregone conclusion as mentioned in this blog//

    ??????

  21. Bruno said, on August 8, 2007 at 12:29 pm

    Why make a conclusion (foregone conclusion) on something, which according to you, makes no sense ???

  22. Barbarindian said, on August 8, 2007 at 12:39 pm

    You mentally live in a medieval society, with guild system and commune living. The rejection of reservation is not just about splitting the goods.

  23. realitycheck said, on August 8, 2007 at 2:12 pm

    >> So you want inclusion or exclusion… Please be clear on this….. >>

    This depends on how strong the identification of the backward classes is. In an ideal situation, the entire creamy layer concept should be removed. This means that the rich folks also get in – but if there are too many such “rich folks” their caste itself stands to be reclassified.

    >> What are the parameters you want to ascertain that a community is backward >>

    The presence of abilities data is the easiest to get for quotas in education. In other words, if members of a caste are adequately represented in the open competition – then there is no case for further protection in the form of quotas for them.

    You also need data in the form of a census (or sample survey) among different category of schools. The communities who dominate rural and corporation schools must get preference over those who are able to attend the best schools.

  24. Observer said, on August 8, 2007 at 11:00 pm


    But did you forget that,

    With exclusion of Creamy Layer – > X will compete in Open Quota (along with Y)
    With Inclusion of Creamy Layer -> X will compete in reservation (so Y is free)

    Umm, I was not intending to be funny. This is a serious matter. The statement above is obviously not true, and you know it quite well. I am not sure if an alternate form of “reservation logic” exists, but the one I am familiar with is the standard logic defined in the dictionary.

    By standard logic, if the CL is included, why would’nt X compete in the open category? Particularly in TN, as is well known, with CL inclusion, most of the seats in the open competition category are taken by the X’s. So obviously the X’s are as well equipped, if not more so, than the Y’s. However, if a Y cannot get into the open competition category, then he has no other options. But X has a backup option. Why this double standard?

    Either the above is really hard to understand, or more likely, people choose not to understand because they do not want to admit it.

    Regarding the institute quota, I am not familiar with all the details, so I will not comment on it either way.

  25. Jai_Choorakkot said, on August 9, 2007 at 7:51 am

    Inclusion / exclusion of creamy layer:

    Sujai K had a post on it, where he explained how reservation across a *few* generations (~5) helps, or is required, to get somebody starting from a nomadic pig-hunter state to one of ~ middle-class jobholder. The description included how the relatively wealthy family serves as a base camp for their still disadvantaged kin to try and launch their own life-improvement.

    Primarily the improvement happens due to a move to urban settings than with enforced quotas but the quota enables the move.

    Once there, ~urban middle class (my definition of creamy layer) the reservation benefits should be cut off.

    The obvious corollary is that with ppl that are closer to this status than pig-hunting nomads, the transition will take place within fewer generations, maybe 2 generations max. Thus there is no one-size-fits-all formula.

    regards,
    Jai

  26. realitycheck said, on August 9, 2007 at 9:39 am

    The “nomadic pig hunter” is obviously an extreme example – but even this group must be held against the basic touchstone of untouchability. If the said pig hunters were not untouchables that they must seek protection under the OBC quota.

    While tags like “nomadic pig hunters” conjure up images of deprivation, it must be held up against some rational test. Is a “rat eater” more needy than a “pig hunter” ? Who gets to call this ? This is why the “presence of abilities” test is the only practical test.

    Once classified as OBC, if this group of pig hunters are able to compete in the open competition – there is no case for further protection to this group. The pig hunters are now in the mainstream and the focus of social justice shifts to groups who are not displaying the same abilities vis-a-vis the open competition.

    We cant give in to these life stories – I could claim my forefathers were poverty stricken cooks who worked all day inhaling firewood smoke and spent their entire lives in dark and grimy kitchens.

    Once you apply the presence of abilities test, then I dont see where the arbitrary concept of advanced individuals (ie, the creamy layer) fits.

  27. realitycheck said, on August 9, 2007 at 9:50 am

    One more point

    >> Sujai K had a post on it, where he explained how reservation across a *few* generations (~5) helps, or is required, to get somebody starting from a nomadic pig-hunter state to one of ~ middle-class jobholder. The >>

    I am willing to explore this angle further as well.

    My first hurdle is this : Should a “rat eater” have to wait for 5 generations of “pig hunters” to advance before he gets his turn ?

    My second hurdle : The 5 generations limit is arbitrary. Whats the guarantee that at the end of 5 generations – they will not advance the goalpost further to 5000 years ? See my post on TN politics (where quotas are already about 4 generations old).

  28. Bruno said, on August 9, 2007 at 12:11 pm

    Reality…

    You have not answered my questions… I am waiting for an answer !!!!

    And then Observer
    //but the one I am familiar with is the standard logic defined in the dictionary.//

    Which Dictionary.. Which logic…. ?????

    In any case, the person who gets benefit in reservation can also come in the open category

    For example, there is a ladies compartment in train
    Ladies can also travel in general compartment

  29. Barbarindian said, on August 9, 2007 at 1:16 pm

    RC,

    You forgot the other very important hurdle, the one about pig hunter from TN vs. hunter gatherer from WB.

    Once again, a rich relative helping out poor cousins through college smacks of Bollywood melodramas. Should we base national policy on life stories? I remain skeptical.

    A rich OBC family should not be burdened by the absurd demand that they help out their poor kin.

  30. Observer said, on August 9, 2007 at 6:10 pm


    In any case, the person who gets benefit in reservation can also come in the open category

    Why? Can the person who is restricted to the open category apply in the reserved category? If not, why not?


    For example, there is a ladies compartment in train
    Ladies can also travel in general compartment

    I knew it, reservations in reservations in trains and airplanes are coming! Jokes aside, please spend a few minutes thinking about the example you have provided above, and you will yourself answer your own question. It does take a mental leap, I understand, but please do try. I will help one last time.

    Why do ladies or handicapped people get a reserved compartment? Because they are weaker, and deserve some protection. Now, if a dude tries to get a seat in the general compartment, and misses the cut-off date (in UP/Bihar gets elbowed out or pushed off the seat), then he should not don a burqa or sari or put on a crutch, claim he feels weak, and go occupy a seat in the reserved compartment.

    Rather than constructing analogies about analogies, one needs to come back to the main point. A son of a software engineer or doctor should compete in the open category. Simple.

  31. Jai_Choorakkot said, on August 10, 2007 at 5:16 am

    Okay RC,

    Yes I appreciate the problems with the pig hunter model. All I am trying to do is not be preceived as obstructionist, and propose some workable model.

    I got the basic logic behind Bruno’s argument:

    >>>
    With exclusion of Creamy Layer -> X will compete in Open Quota ( with Y)
    With Inclusion of Creamy Layer -> X will compete in reservation (so Y is free)

    So as per your own logic, If Y should not be affected by X who is equal to him, Creamy Layer should be included
    >>>

    Its very similar to mine several months ago when I pointed out on this blog, that YFE seem to be working against their selfish interests, the excluded creamy will compete *harder* into the general quota, and the disadvantaged real needy will fill up their quota as originally supposed to.

    While I support this, it is indeed a little unrealistic from the prism of narrow self-interest, hence leading to the doubt that its just a tactic to bury reservations, or hold it off for as long as possible. No actual sympathy for any deserving Z.

    regards,
    Jai

  32. realitycheck said, on August 10, 2007 at 5:42 am

    Jai,

    I am working on a post on what the future agenda of YFE ought to be.

    If the ruling class has to choose between fresh classification based on data Vs the status quo – I believe they will pick the status quo.

    One of the original demands of YFE was for a fresh study (eg by a new commission) – they must now push for this even harder. This will show their bonafides wrt social justice.

    You right about the creamy layer fighting harder – but it will remove one of the most emotive issues – that of preferential treatment to fellow students who are equal to or better in circumstance.

  33. Bruno said, on August 11, 2007 at 6:56 am

    //Why do ladies or handicapped people get a reserved compartment? Because they are weaker, and deserve some protection. //

    Because OBC were refused education for 20 centuries, they are weaker (even though they may be economically and physically strong) and so we need to give them quotas….

    //f a dude tries to get a seat in the general compartment, and misses the cut-off date (in UP/Bihar gets elbowed out or pushed off the seat), then he should not don a burqa or sari or put on a crutch, claim he feels weak, and go occupy a seat in the reserved compartment.//

    Exactly…. but if something like this happens, it is a mistake of the forward caste….. AND For the OBC to get benefits, this should be PREVENTED…. I fully concur with you.. 🙂 🙂 🙂

  34. Bruno said, on August 11, 2007 at 6:58 am

    //YFE seem to be working against their selfish interests,//

    Ha Ha Ha,,,, YFE …They are not fighting for merit… They are fighting for casteism… .Pure fanatism …

    In AIIMS
    Institute Quota is 33%
    OBC Quota (proposed) is 27%

    What can we tell about those guys who start an indefinite fast opposing OBC Quota, while not evening giving a single press release against Institute Quota…

    What could be their motive – Merit (their hollow claim) or Racism / fanaticism — This is for any one to decide

  35. Bruno said, on August 11, 2007 at 6:59 am

    To be frank (and blunt)…. my opinion (again my opinion)

    Any one who selectively opposed Caste Based Reservation ALONE is racist and fanatic

    And AT THAT SAME TIME

    Any one who “selectively argues for Caste Based Reservation”, while ignoring handicapped quotas, quotas for widows, quotas for Gender (around 30% of seats are reserved for females in many institutions) Sons/Daughters/Grandsons/Grand daughters of Freedom Fighters Sports personalities, Dependants of armed forces personnel killed in action, Repatriates, Those born from inter-caste marriages Widows and deserted women

    is also equally racist and fanatic !!!!

    When one section (mentioned) is wrong (fanatic) it does not mean that the other section is right (noble)….. Both of the above groups spoil the society

  36. Bruno said, on August 11, 2007 at 7:02 am

    Reality…. What do you think are the parameters you will use for Fresh Classification….

    WHy is that NO ONE , who is anti reservation, has given these parameters…. This gives me a feeling that all this demand for “new study” / “Fresh study” is only a delaying tactic which is immoral…..

    In my Opinion the best parameter will be whether the individual’s parent has availed reservation or not….

    But will the powers agree for that…

    Let us a tleast find what all these anti caste based reservation guys have regarding this

  37. Bruno said, on August 11, 2007 at 7:11 am

    Observer… That analogy was given because your comments made be think that you did not know basic facts about reservation

    The fact is ladies can get into ladies compartment as well as general compartment
    Physically handicapped candidates can get into both compartments

    Similarly, OBC can get into OBC Quota as well as General Quota….. This is the basis of reservation.. Have you understood this ATLEAST NOW or are you still confused

    //While I support this, it is indeed a little unrealistic from the prism of narrow self-interest, hence leading to the doubt that its just a tactic to bury reservations, or hold it off for as long as possible. No actual sympathy for any deserving Z.//
    Exactly…..

    If YFE had worried about Merit, they would have opposed the 33% Quota and 100 % quota along with the 27 % quota… The protest looses its honesty and integrity

    I fully understand that the guys in Delhi have a right to protest .. I am not questioning that.,…. But my concern is that they should be honest enough to tell the true reason and not cheat others by telling “Merit”

  38. Barbarindian said, on August 11, 2007 at 6:56 pm

    But my concern is that they should be honest enough to tell the true reason and not cheat others by telling “Merit”

    Likewise the others should be honest enough to tell the true reason and not cheat others by telling “Social Justice”.

  39. Observer said, on August 11, 2007 at 10:25 pm


    Because OBC were refused education for 20 centuries, they are weaker (even though they may be economically and physically strong) and so we need to give them quotas….

    Hmm I never knew 2000 years ago Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Biotechnology, and other Western subjects were taught by the FC, who cruelly refused to admit others. This is truly an astounding revelation! Where can we find evidence of this?

  40. Observer said, on August 11, 2007 at 10:28 pm


    The fact is ladies can get into ladies compartment as well as general compartment
    Physically handicapped candidates can get into both compartments

    This works because the number of seats reserved is usually a fraction of the total number of seats. Declaring 95.7% of passengers as women and physically handicapped, and then reserving 69% of seats does not make any sense.

  41. Observer said, on August 11, 2007 at 10:36 pm


    To be frank (and blunt)…. my opinion (again my opinion)

    Any one who selectively opposed Caste Based Reservation ALONE is racist and fanatic

    I thought it was the other way around. Those who want caste to be the main factor in admissions are the real fanatics and casteists. Don’t be lazy, study hard and stop depending upon doles handed out by the politicians. And this underdog angle copied from American blogs just does not make any sense, what races are we talking about in India?

  42. B Shantanu said, on August 15, 2007 at 4:09 pm

    I see some comments here re. lack of education/access to education with regards OBCs.

    I am not sure this is true.

    Have alook at these two links:
    http://www.rediff.com/money/2007/apr/24guest.htm

    and

    http://www.newindpress.com/column/News.asp?Topic=-97&Title=S%2EGurumurthy&ID=IE620061115230938&nDate=&Sub=&Cat

    Has anyone come across them before? RC?

    Thanks

  43. Bruno said, on August 16, 2007 at 2:37 pm

    //Likewise the others should be honest enough to tell the true reason and not cheat others by telling “Social Justice”.//

    //I thought it was the other way around. //

    Yes… i have given this also….. I never denied this… Please see my comment in full again

    Any one who “selectively argues for Caste Based Reservation”, while ignoring ……

    is also equally racist and fanatic !!!!

    I never denied that…

    My only contention is that racists are using merit as an excuse

  44. Bruno said, on August 16, 2007 at 2:37 pm

    //what races are we talking about in India?//

    Races which had access to education for 2000 years

    and

    Races which were denied education for 2000 years

    Quite simple… isn’t it

  45. Bruno said, on August 16, 2007 at 2:47 pm

    Institute Quota in AIIMS in 33%

    Caste Based Quota is 27 %

    Which is higher
    Which is lower

    If a guy is concerned about Merit, which he should oppose
    Why Youth for Equality is Not worried about an inequality of 33%, but worried about an (proposed) inequality of 27 %

    So hollow claims like “a fraction of the total number of seats” is totally baseless

    Instead of repeating the same useless, foolish points again and again I suggest anti reservation guys that they do some reading (like RC and Barbar) and try to argue with facts….

    Based on few comments, i can see that there are quite a few of commentators who have TOTALLY NO IDEA ABOUT Quotas, Reservation etc…. but is arguing against the quota for the simple reason some one asked you to argue and threated that “your community is going to loose the seats”

  46. Bruno said, on August 16, 2007 at 2:55 pm

    //Hmm I never knew 2000 years ago Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Biotechnology, and other Western subjects were taught by the FC, who cruelly refused to admit others. This is truly an astounding revelation! //
    It is not mechanical engineering…. It is the reading and writing……….
    Music was taught only to Forward Castes…..Literature was taught only to forward castes… astrology was taught only to forward castes… bharatanatyam was taught only to forward castes./…..

    The backward castes were not even taught to read and write, let alone E=MC2

    40 years ago, the leading music directors of tamil nadu were all forward caste people (Viswanathan, ramamoorthy)..> Why… Is it because otehr communities do not have talent… no.. Other communities were not taught ….

    See the leading music directors of Tamil Nadu today

    1. Ilayaraja
    2. Deva
    3. Imman
    4. S.A.Rajakumar….

    When the shackles of caste was removed by periyar and Kamarajar, we have guys from all communities shining !!!!

    Why were not guys from other communities able to shine in music field for 2000 years….. .Because of the simple reason they were not taught

    //Where can we find evidence of this?//

    If the evidence given above is not enough see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekalavya

    Not only lower castes were denied education, but were even prevented from using what they learnt by themselves….

    And we have this story in our class books, polluting the mind of young students, telling them that education is based on caste, and they go on to form associations promoting racism and fanatism

  47. Barbarindian said, on August 16, 2007 at 11:38 pm

    Institute Quota in AIIMS in 33%

    Myths are still being spread about “institute quota” at AIIMS.

    To give an analogy, suppose we introduce the following rule for the Engineering schools:

    1) Admission process continues as before through entrance exams specifically meant for each school
    2) At the end of first semester, the grades of the students are used to decide where the student will continue the rest of their Engineering degree on an all India basis.
    3) If the all India grade of a student (regardless of the school he got his admission) is towards the lower side, he will have to pack his bag for the a similarly ranked school.

  48. Barbarindian said, on August 16, 2007 at 11:41 pm

    Of course it must be noted that if an OBC student at MBBS falls within the top 33% in his MBBS, he will naturally be eligible for the “institute quota” and get a seat in specialized masters courses at AIIMS.

  49. srinias said, on August 18, 2007 at 5:00 am

    Mr Bruno was taking abour music without knowing that music is part and parcel of every Hindu irrespective of caste.

    There were many non brahmins who did exceptionally well in music before eg..DWARAM VENKATA SWAMY NAIDU of AP who excelled in violin during 1930’s and he never complained that he was not taught.Some of his children are artists in all India radio. From TN ,we had MS Subbulakshmi,ML vasanta kumari,Pattammal and so many greats and they never compalined that they were not taught.So many non Brahmins contributed to music in India.India music unlike wetern music is more varied and it entered into all walks of life.Cinama music is only one variety of music .
    Hindus of all castes are music lovers at heart and in olden days every caste used to have their own music.The people working in agricultural fields used to sing their folk music.Indian folk music is much rich in heritage and values than the classical system and the present day cinema music.Hindus have songs specially catered to occasions like marraige,birth,daily job etc.So caste here has no meaning to Hindud in music.
    .

  50. Revathi said, on August 18, 2007 at 4:41 pm

    I dont think backward castes were denied education ever. They probably didnt recite the vedas but they could read, write, do math and science ( here I mean the men, most women from all castes were illiterate) Most physicians were from castes that claim to be backward today, there were temple musicians and dancers, and scribes (Karunanidhi^s ancestors) and even kings that have claimed backward status today. The ekalavya example holds only for dalits who were indeed denied education for 2000 years. I think that the OBCs should be instead more proud of their rich heritage rather than whining that they were illiterate. It is funny that people who dont believe that Krishna was the author of the bhagawadgita are ready to believe the story of Ekalavya.

  51. Observer said, on August 18, 2007 at 10:36 pm


    //Hmm I never knew 2000 years ago Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Biotechnology, and other Western subjects were taught by the FC, who cruelly refused to admit others. This is truly an astounding revelation! //
    It is not mechanical engineering…. It is the reading and writing……….

    So why reservations in mechanical engineering courses?


    Music was taught only to Forward Castes…..Literature was taught only to forward castes… astrology was taught only to forward castes… bharatanatyam was taught only to forward castes./…..

    Are we living in the same India? Or is this the Evangelical version of Indian history taught during conversion classes? The very name of Karunanidhi’s caste (Isai Vellalar) ought to provide a hint. Nadaswaram, Bhakti songs etc were in many cases penned by the so-called “backward” castes of today. I did not know Thiruvalluvar, a giant of Tamil literature was a Brahmin! Please some one tell Karunanidhi!

    The standard lies are not going to work, we are not fools here. First the myth of oppression, if that does not work, the bogey of “proportionate representation” like a true communist, and if that also fails, the “constitution”!

    Greed knows no bounds, and the most horrific crimes in history have been committed all the while in the name of “social justice”, just like Nazi Germany..er I mean Tamil Nadu. It is a gloomy thought that in India, all that counts is numbers. At least our North Indian Brahmins were smart enough to not restrict their population, and now Mayawati will push through a constitutional amendment to hopefully set things right 🙂

  52. Observer said, on August 19, 2007 at 2:38 am


    //Hmm I never knew 2000 years ago Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Biotechnology, and other Western subjects were taught by the FC, who cruelly refused to admit others. This is truly an astounding revelation! //
    It is not mechanical engineering…. It is the reading and writing……….
    Music was taught only to Forward Castes…..Literature was taught only to forward castes… astrology was taught only to forward castes… bharatanatyam was taught only to forward castes./…..

    So why reservations in Mechanical Engineering and Electrical Engineering and not in reading and writing of Sanskrit? What relations do astrology and Sanskrit have with Nuclear Engineering? Coming to Music, Alwars were not Brahmins, and they dominated the Bhakti music scene in medieval times. Tiruvalluvar was not a Brahmin, and he is considered to be one of the greatest authors of ancient times. Karunanithi’s caste is called Isai Vellalar (hint Isai == music). Now why would they be called that? I think people should stop reading the Evangelical church’s version of Indian history taught during conversion classes and pay heed to reason, logic, putting 2+2 together and ending up with 4 rather than 5.

    My position has been very clear. Only Dalits deserve any benefits of reverse discrimination. Other castes who piggyback on their case and try to use the Evangelical Church’s version of history to justify their grabbing of others’ efforts in the name of “social justice” are intellectually dishonest and ought to be ashamed of themselves. Even today most of the caste clashes in TN are between Dalits and other so-called “backward” castes. It is an abomination to provide the benefits of reverse discrimination to people who actually beat and behead Dalits! But then, this is Tamil Nadu, land of the “We 96% want minimum 69% reservation and we also want to compete in the remaining 31%” logic. A political landscape of absurdity!

  53. Observer said, on August 19, 2007 at 2:51 am


    //Where can we find evidence of this?//

    If the evidence given above is not enough see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekalavya

    This is evidence?! These are mythological stories! Based on this, maybe we should also accept then that the Sethusamudram project should be stopped because the man made bridge was constructed by Rama as described in the Ramayana! We are in the twenty-first century people. Policies should be based on clear and current evidence and not on mythological stories! Who knows what happened back then? Maybe all the social justice folks can invent a time-machine and take it up personally with the folks who wrote those stories. Why the hell am *I* being made a scapegoat for those stories?!

    In fact, there is far more evidence that Muslims and Christians killed millions and millions of Hindus. So how about we deny all Muslims and Christians any property ownership, any modern education, any access to justice and reserve a place for them in Andaman and Nicobar jail? Wonder why Christians are so concerned about the plight of Hindu castes, and the creamy layer in Hindu castes? Why should they have an opinion in this matter? Let Hindus worry about this, OK?

  54. Observer said, on August 19, 2007 at 3:04 am


    Based on few comments, i can see that there are quite a few of commentators who have TOTALLY NO IDEA ABOUT Quotas, Reservation etc…. but is arguing against the quota for the simple reason some one asked you to argue and threated that “your community is going to loose the seats”

    Ummm…there might be a teeny weeny possibility that I might have some idea about quotas, CONSIDERING THAT I HAD EXPERIENCED THIS “SOCIAL JUSTICE” FIRSTHAND (sorry about the caps, just following the trend here and trying to communicate in the same language). In fact, myself and two of my relatives had been on the receiving end of the “social justice” policies where even after topping in our schools, and scoring 97% on the CET, we could not get into any Govt Engineering college, while my neighbor who happened to be a Mudaliar got himself a BC certificate and got into Anna University (MechE 94 batch). So I do not need any preaching or lectures about the “wonderful” social justice system and the oh-so-oppressed made up sob story and why I should starve. Sorry, I do not buy it, and I am glad to note more and more outside of Tamil Nadu are becoming suspicious of these antics going on in TN.

  55. Observer said, on August 19, 2007 at 3:22 am

    I am beginning to understand some of the psychology of the fascist communists in TN. People know very well they are getting benefits at the expense of others, so they need to develop a defense mechanism to quiet their conscience. Aha! Pick some unfortunate group like Dalits and pile on the sob stories (after all, communist propaganda techniques instruct that if a lie is told a hundred times, people start believing it themselves!), and convince others, but primarily oneself that denying others their fundamental right is now suddenly ok because 2000 years ago in some stories some wandering drunk bard might have written somebody got oppressed! Boy, now I sure feel a lot better now that I know that the poor Brahmin boy walking down the street whom I pass in my car everyday is actually oppressing me for thousands of years, damn his cursed soul. Ok, now where is my “backward” certificate that I can use to get me a nice cushy job, and reflect some more on how I still feel oppressed.I need to also make sure my children are also up-to-date on their backwardness, the world is getting so oppressive day by day even though my caste members are all in power. Even then I feel so oppressed 😦 Dang Brahmins.

  56. Observer said, on August 19, 2007 at 3:28 am

    My cousin tells me that 3 co-workers he knows at TCS (very well-paid I might add), have acquired MBC certificates for their 8th and 10th standard children! Long live social justice. Long live communism! Never mind that communism has led to the death of millions and our Chief Minister proudly names his son Stalin, the genocidal maniac. Maybe the grandson will be named Mao, another mass murderer. This is great…

  57. Observer said, on August 19, 2007 at 3:32 am

    Well, anyway I am taking some time off this blog. Arguing with brazen fascist communist types who have no moral compunctions in crushing a helpless minority is taking a toll on me. At this rate I might get self-radicalized like those Muslims on the internet. So for my own sanity, I bid adieu.

  58. realitycheck said, on August 20, 2007 at 6:48 am

    Observer,

    Calm down.

    If you take a step back and think about it, these are the ground truths.

    1) You cant make anyone or any group of people love Brahmins or any other caste.

    2) You cant prevent any group from choosing its own icons/heroes/demigods.

    3) You cant prevent lampooning, ridicule, insult, or provocation by any group towards any other group. Case in point – Sardaji jokes, brahmin accent etc.

    So where is the line ?

    Anyone is free to make degrading films, writing inflammatory material, promoting ill will towards a group, inventing or exagerrating stories of oppression, or exhibiting their wealth, power, and political muscle in a brazen fashion. The codified laws against these kinds of behaviour are weak.

    All the above (even if causing emotional pain to the targets) is even. So where is the line ?

    What is NOT OK is hijacking a social justice program meant for the backward sections as a legal means to exclude a group based on the above instincts of hatred !

    In other words, the ruling classes are free to ridicule or show off wealth and political power to their hearts content – but cant usurp fundamental rights.

    If the constitution cannot protect this – we might as well chuck it and enjoy the descent into anarchy and mayhem.

  59. realitycheck said, on August 20, 2007 at 6:50 am

    People not from Tamilnadu – please ignore the above comment. You will not understand.

  60. Revathi said, on August 20, 2007 at 3:21 pm

    I agree that you can make people love a certain group but you can make people hate each other by propaganda.

  61. Revathi said, on August 20, 2007 at 3:23 pm

    I meant to say “you cant make people love a certain group” sorry for the error.

  62. S Ramesh said, on August 2, 2009 at 2:05 pm

    http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090802/jsp/nation/story_11311599.jsp

    “At least 1,300 of the 1,930 Other Backward Class students admitted to the IITs through the Joint Entrance Examination secured marks that would have guaranteed them seats even without the quotas, details released today show.

    In chemistry, the OBC topper notched 126 — four more than the general category (and overall) top ranker.

    The lowest-ranking selected general category student scored less in mathematics (31) than his or her counterpart from the OBC (63), Scheduled Caste (41), Scheduled Tribe (40) and physically handicapped (36) quota categories. ..”

    It is high time to bust the myth of superiority of general category. It seems they have the reservation.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: